This article (by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya) first published by GR in November 2006 is of particular relevance to an understanding of the ongoing process of destabilization and political fragmentation of Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

John Kerry’s “Plan B” consists in breaking up Syria and Iraq.

“Hegemony is as old as Mankind…”
(Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor).

The term “New Middle East” was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was credited by the Western media for coining the term) in replacement of the older and more imposing term, the “Greater Middle East.”

This shift in foreign policy phraseology coincided with the inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Oil Terminal in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The term and conceptualization of the “New Middle East,” was subsequently heralded by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Israeli Prime Minister at the height of the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon.

Prime Minister Olmert and Secretary Rice had informed the international media that a project for a “New Middle East” was being launched from Lebanon.

– The Anglo-American Military Roadmap in the Middle East and Central Asia

– The Map of the “New Middle East”

– “Necessary Pain”

– The Turkish Protest at NATO’s Military College in Rome

– Is there a Connection between Zbigniew Brzezinski’s “Eurasian Balkans” and the “New Middle East” Project?

With the U.S. Air Force Secretary, Deborah James having described Russia as “the biggest threat” to the American interests on Wednesday, July 8, the latest version of the “National Military Strategy of the United States” seems to echo James.

The document has alredy generated a wave of expert comments.

Within Russia, the media focus has been on two of its provisions, especially the one that refers to Russia as a “revisionist power.”

For the authors of the National Military Strategy, the solution lies in building military infrastructure at the regional level.

Not by accident is the first objective in a hypothetical conflict to thwart the primary goals of the aggressor.

This is possible only with real U.S. forces on the ground in problem areas (from Washington’s viewpoint).

In a sense, the Americans plan to tweak their technical means with a view to implementation.

If you think the globalists are pushing pedal to the metal now, you’re absolutely right! Rapid acceleration toward their one world government has humanity on a fateful collision course to Armageddon. Just look at the unfolding events in 2015 so far with barely half the year over. The Charlie Hebdo attack in January came right after France moved to recognize a sovereign Palestinian state. Clearly Hebdo was a false flag payback that only escalated movement toward more Orwellian tyranny and draconian police state oppression, not only in France but around the world.

Hebdo’s aftermath in Paris with world leaders gathered arm-in-arm flanked by a duped million plus strong waving their false freedom flags reeked of foul stench – a hideous pretense of staged mockery defiance. The pathetic irony is the very same terrorist acts they were protesting against are regularly and deceitfully perpetrated by those very same international crime cabal leaders who diabolically profit from their state-sponsored terrorism. Afterwards their ratings in popularity only surge (in the wake of the recent South Carolina mass killing, Obama recorded his highest approval ratings of over 50% since 2013) while their corrupt power only tightens the NWO noose of absolute control around the necks of the global masses as their treasonous leaders celebrate arm-in-arm liberty’s death march.

Meanwhile also by design, the West’s created Frankenstein monster on steroids ISIS spreads its reach of lustful destruction not only throughout the Middle East but into Africa, Europe and Eurasia as well. It’s now partnering up with Boko Haram and al-Shabaab terrorist groups in Africa and beyond.

Standard reporting on the document misses a few key details that make the strategy even more dangerous than people initially realize.

Much has already been written about the US’ National Military Strategy (NMS) since it’s updated unveiling last week, but most analysts haven’t pieced together the finer details of the document that speak to its most lethal aspects. Here’s what they’re missing and why these undiscussed components are so critical in understanding the Pentagon’s forthcoming plans.

Everyone’s spoken about Russia’s inclusion alongside Iran and North Korea as the main state targets of the NMS, but few have drawn parallels to George Bush’s 2002 “Axis of Evil” proclamation.

From this angle, Russia replaces Iraq, and the other two, Iran and North Korea, remain the same. Taking it even further, the purposefully ambiguous language being used in regards to China essentially qualifies it as the fourth member of the “Axis of Evil 2.0”.

The importance behind these four states’ inclusion is that each of them is located in a specific corner of Eurasia that the US plans to exploit in explaining its military buildup there.

On Friday, presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton addressed a hand-picked audience at a Dartmouth College campaign event. She lied calling Iran an “existential threat to Israel… I hope we are able to get a deal next week that puts a lid on (its) nuclear weapons program.”

US and Israeli intelligence both say Iran’s nuclear program has no military component. No evidence whatever suggests Tehran wants one. Plenty indicates otherwise.

As a 2008 presidential aspirant, she addressed AIPAC’s annual convention saying: “I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them”… … …

An American journalist says a nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries is unlikely due to the ongoing attempts by the US Senate to sabotage the nuclear talks.

“The State Department which has a lot of Israel lobby influence, with regard to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the neo-conservatives… they want war with Iran and they want to sabotage those talks in any way that they can,” he noted.

Morris said the demands “with regard to inspection of the military sites when Iran is a signer of the NPT, nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty — when Israel… with 200 to 400 nukes is not, and won’t allow even the UN to go in and take a look at their nuclear facility at Dimona — it’s a blatant double standard that the US is pushing here and I think it’s a very concerning situation that even though Secretary [of State John] Kerry has said that we would like a deal but — paraphrasing of course — we don’t have to have one necessarily”.

NOTICE TO READERS

These infos are not intended to be shocking or to glorify violence in any way. These articles/images/videos are for educational purposes only, for documenting and try to explain the backdrop of a historical ruthless and bloody war, whose characteristics and details are routinely distorted and smothered by the dominant media.